Sting's forest lobby attacks 'green' timber trade
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Rainforest Foundation, which was set up by Sting and his wife, Trudi Styler, fell foul of other environmental groups yesterday by declaring that a scheme to promote ecologically sound timber was deceiving consumers.
The foundation claimed in a report that the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) had failed to police the system for certifying that timber bearing its logo had been produced in a way that did not add to the destruction of rainforests or the exploitation of local people. The FSC was set up in 1993 to reassure consumers, and it has the support of groups includingFriends of the Earth and the Worldwide Fund for Nature.
But the foundation claimed that timber companies certified by the FSC were implicated in human rights abuses, were logging in the rainforest habitats of endangered wildlife such as the Sumatran tiger and that "uncertified" wood had been labelled as environmentally friendly. The report also accused the FSC of marginalising local communities in its decision-making process.
In its response, the council said it would investigate any abuses of human rights and asked the foundation for further details. It said the claim about the Sumatran tigers referred to concerns about a particular company in Indonesia which had already been dealt with by the local certification body.
But it added: "Concerns over tigers were not upheld as repeated audits have found evidence that wildlife, including tigers, are actually moving into the certified area as a result of improved forest management in the certified area."
The FSC said that when breaches of the certification system were found, action was taken immediately. "Whilst we welcome the Rainforest Foundation report for its extensive research we find that it cites many cases that have long been solved and in some cases major rule changes in FSC have resulted.''
Beatrix Richards, forests policy officer of the Worldwide Fund for Nature, said: "We have faith that this system is the best one available and that any faults can be dealt with. We can't do away with the council because what would you replace it with?"
A spokesman for Greenpeace, which is not a member of the FSC's council, said it still backed the body. "It's the only credible system that exists. The report does identify some failings and if that helps to strengthen the FSC, it can only be a good thing."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments